[net.legal] Seatbelts, NTSB revelations

rob@dadla.UUCP (Rob Vetter) (08/14/86)

	In a recent statement, the NTSB (National Transportation and
	Safety Board) said that lap belts could cause injury (to
	kidneys, spine, and other lower viceral organs) in the case
	of an accident, and that they "don't know" if the benefits of
	wearing them outweigh the risks.

	The NTSB went further to state that shoulder straps, common in
	front seats, should be added to the belts in back.

	Many states now have seatbelt laws based partially on the NSTB's
	earlier findings.  In Oregon, wearing belts is manditory for
	anyone under 16 - the group most often found in the back seats
	where lap belts are most prevalent.

	I opposed the Oregon law on Civil Rights grounds.  Now, it
	appears that I COULD have opposed a manditory seatbelt law for
	SAFETY reasons.

	I'm still waiting for a report detailing the risks to the neck,
	clavicle, and chest when in an accident wearing the shoulder
	strap.
-- 

Rob Vetter
(503) 629-1044
[ihnp4, ucbvax, decvax, uw-beaver]!tektronix!dadla!rob

"Waste is a terrible thing to mind" - NRC
  (Well, they COULD have said it)

sewilco@mecc.UUCP (Scot E. Wilcoxon) (08/18/86)

[net.news is not for newspaper items, so it was removed from subject]

In article <976@dadla.UUCP> rob@dadla (Rob Vetter) writes:
>
>	In a recent statement, the NTSB (National Transportation and
>	Safety Board) said that lap belts could cause injury (to
>	kidneys, spine, and other lower viceral organs) in the case
>	of an accident, and that they "don't know" if the benefits of
>	wearing them outweigh the risks.
>...

Rob quotes above that the NTSB doesn't know if the benefits of wearing
lap belts "outweigh the risks".  He must mean whether the risks of
wearing a lap belt outweigh the risks of not wearing them.  Then he
goes on...
>	Many states now have seatbelt laws based partially on the NSTB's
>	earlier findings.  In Oregon, wearing belts is manditory for
>...

Based on the NTSB's earlier findings?  Surely you mean their findings
on the risks of wearing the belts versus not wearing them.  So who
"don't know" what benefits?  Actually, I heard the report simply showed
some risks of lap belts, with no comparison between lap belt and no belt.
(Think about it..there have been studies on belt vs no belt)

>	I opposed the Oregon law on Civil Rights grounds.  Now, it
>	appears that I COULD have opposed a manditory seatbelt law for
>	SAFETY reasons.
Ha.  It is humorously bizarre idea.
>	I'm still waiting for a report detailing the risks to the neck,
>	clavicle, and chest when in an accident wearing the shoulder
>	strap.

I'm sure you'll find them in some old "unbelted vs lap&shoulder belt"
report.  There were, um, a few made before Detroit finally decided belts
might be worth putting in cars.

The current argument is over whether people should be required to wear
belts or should they pay for airbags?  (Congress has already decided that
if we don't wear belts then we'll get airbags)

If you must fuss about belts, move to the endless discussion in net.auto.
Frankly, Ron's article sounds like the recent ones claiming that helmets
provide very little protection in a crash..the articles were squelched
by inquiries on how well an unhelmeted head fared in a crash.
-- 
Scot E. Wilcoxon    Minn Ed Comp Corp  {quest,dicome,meccts}!mecc!sewilco
45 03 N  93 08 W (612)481-3507 {{caip!meccts},ihnp4,philabs}!mecc!sewilco
	Laws are society's common sense, recorded for the stupid.
	The alert question everything anyway.

showard@udenva.UUCP (Steve "Blore" Howard) (08/19/86)

In article <976@dadla.UUCP> rob@dadla (Rob Vetter) writes:
>
>	In a recent statement, the NTSB (National Transportation and
>	Safety Board) said that lap belts could cause injury (to
>	kidneys, spine, and other lower viceral organs) in the case
>	of an accident, and that they "don't know" if the benefits of
>	wearing them outweigh the risks.
>
      The results of that study apply only to back seat seatbelts ("back
seat belts" sounds funny.) and only to head-on collisions.  And, as 
with most studies and tests lately, the findings are being disputed by
several people.

-- 
 
"I've been Ayn Randed and nearly branded a communist 'cause I'm left-handed.
 That's the hand you use -- well, never mind" 

Steve "Blore" Howard, I.O.S.T.
                      {hplabs, seismo}!hao!udenva!showard
or {boulder, cires, ucbvax!nbires, cisden}!udenva!showard

korn@cory.Berkeley.EDU (Peter "Arrgh" Korn) (08/22/86)

In article <1897@udenva.UUCP> showard@udenva.UUCP (Steve "Blore" Howard) writes:
>In article <976@dadla.UUCP> rob@dadla (Rob Vetter) writes:
>>
>>	In a recent statement, the NTSB (National Transportation and
>>	Safety Board) said that lap belts could cause injury (to
>>	kidneys, spine, and other lower viceral organs) in the case
>>	of an accident, and that they "don't know" if the benefits of
>>	wearing them outweigh the risks.
>>
>      The results of that study apply only to back seat seatbelts ("back
>seat belts" sounds funny.) and only to head-on collisions.  And, as 
>with most studies and tests lately, the findings are being disputed by
>several people.

I don't know the statistics on head-on collisions vs. non-head on collisions,
but having been in the back seat of a head-on collision, I can assure you,
all studies' evidence to the contrary, that I jack-knifed into the seat
in front of me and messed up my face quite a bit.  That wouldn't have happened
had I been wearing a shoulder strap.

Geeze, how hard can it be to put in shoulder straps in the rear as well as
the front?  It's easily worth an additional $20 in the cost of a new car.

Peter

P.S.  Why is this in net.NEWS and not net.auto?
-----						  
Peter "Arrgh" Korn		       "Fred Astaire?  Heck, Ginger Rogers did 
korn@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU			  everything he did, backwards,
{decvax,dual,hplabs,sdcsvax,ulysses}!ucbvax!korn            and in high heels!"

campbell@maynard.UUCP (Larry Campbell) (08/22/86)

>P.S.  Why is this in net.NEWS and not net.auto?

Yes indeed... PLEASE take this discussion out of net.news!  Apparently
the original poster was not aware (and was too lazy to check) that
net.news is for discussions about the news software, NOT about random
current events.  I have directed followups to net.auto.
-- 
Larry Campbell                             The Boston Software Works, Inc.
ARPA: campbell%maynard.uucp@harvard.ARPA   120 Fulton Street, Boston MA 02109
UUCP: {alliant,wjh12}!maynard!campbell     (617) 367-6846